From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [net 3/6] net/mlx5: FPGA, return -EINVAL if size is zero
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 15:13:16 +0900
Message-ID: <1510294396.5405.11.camel@mellanox.com>
References: <20171108072142.30870-1-saeedm@mellanox.com>
         <20171108072142.30870-4-saeedm@mellanox.com>
         <CAJ3xEMikKDeUDdXPn9gjKB_iL8itSyz_Q5U6Y+UrKZ6E6SCHrw@mail.gmail.com>
         <1510213411.16499.2.camel@mellanox.com>
         <CAJ3xEMhU8NPxWVXvNoSkjgGWE+qefnMUek90+1J1BGXuozHSZA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@mellanox.com>
To: Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@gmail.com>, Kamal Heib <kamalh@mellanox.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-he1eur01on0050.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.0.50]:8224
        "EHLO EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751226AbdKJGNv (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 10 Nov 2017 01:13:51 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CAJ3xEMhU8NPxWVXvNoSkjgGWE+qefnMUek90+1J1BGXuozHSZA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, 2017-11-09 at 18:12 +0900, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Kamal Heib <kamalh@mellanox.com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-11-08 at 23:13 +0900, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.c
> > > om>
> > > wrote:
> > > > From: Kamal Heib <kamalh@mellanox.com>
> > > > 
> > > > In the current code, if a size of zero is passed to
> > > > mlx5_fpga_mem_{read|write}_i2c() functions the "err"
> > > 
> > > Don't we need to fix the call site where zero size is provided
> > > and
> > > not
> > > in called function?
> > > 
> > 
> > Isn't sending down a zero size a sign for a bug which we are not
> > fixing?
> > > 
> > 
> > Both functions are called from an exported symbols. so I think the
> > size
> > validation should be within this two functions just like the case
> > of
> > checking that mdev isn't set.
> 
> mmm, I see exported to who exactly? how are they being called, by
> func pointer?
> can you point to the call sites?

Or, are you ok with this patch ? I would like to post V2 with the
reviewed-by tag fix.